Technically legal? Sure, they're the legislature, they can do whatever they want. Incredibly disappointing as a voter.
[0]: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/11/utah-medicaid-expa...
Except for staying in office if the voters vote them out.
A year later, she said she’s still studying the proposal.
She’s happy about voting for those expanded pentagon budgets though!
The problem with mental health care is that such providers either don't exist or are very rare, meaning there is little to no effective care to be had for any amount of money. Simply throwing more money at this problem will not do anything to solve it.
On the other hand, if an individual provider can rely on getting a fee for service without crazy overheads of private insurance approvals/unapprovals, then they can make a business commitment to supplying that service. This costs far less overall when you don't have to price risk and extra work into the service rendered.
As I responded to your sibling commenter, I don't think my original point was clear. I'm asserting that those existing provider services suck and are ineffective, and that what is needed is a paradigm shift in how mental health care is formulated and delivered, not a spread of those existing services.
The funding societally is so poor now that the common end path is people ending up in prison. And, as the article indicates, it's not like the private insurance companies are picking up the expenditure.